Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Whpq: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia
Content deleted Content added
| (12 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: <div class="boilerplate rfa" style="background-color: #f5fff5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> :''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a '''successful''' [[wikipedia:requests for adminship|request for adminship]]. <strong style="color:red">Please do not modify it</strong>.''[[Category:Successful requests for adminship|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] ===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Whpq|Whpq]]=== '''Final: (213/9/0) - Closed as successful by [[User:Acalamari|Acalamari]] at 03:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)'''
====Nomination==== Line 288 ⟶ 290: # '''Support'''. I like that he has been involved in and understaffed part of the project, and I'm eager to support candidates with some proficiency in such areas. I like to see familiarity with content creation and Whpq passes my (low) bar. I've seen multiple ArbCom desysops this year and am not concerned about add-on avenues for pulling the mop. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 02:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''', trusted contributor, no red lights. By the way, none of the opposes is based on the candidate's merits, while here it's merits that matter. — [[User:Kashmiri|<span style="color:#30c;font:italic bold 1em 'Candara';text-shadow:#aaf 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em;">kashmīrī</span>]] [[User talk:Kashmiri|<sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK</sup>]] 11:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' Why Not? Recall is not "accountability" in any meaningful sense of the word. --[[User:Guerillero|<span style="color: #0b0080">Guerillero</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Guerillero|<span style="color: green;">Parlez Moi</span>]]</sup> 14:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)▼ #'''Support''' per excellent answer to Q4. I'm thrilled that the candidate has stood up to the borderline bullying of candidates over recall, and that this RFA has made it abundantly clear that recall is in no way, shape, or form a requirement for new admins going forward. Hopedully those that keep trying to make this a ''de facto'' requirement can finally see that it very much is not and will stop pushing recall at every RFA. It's time to stop pretending we have a recall process. --[[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 16:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' looks good, oppose reasons are unconvincing to me. [[User:JesseW|JesseW, the juggling janitor]] 17:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' - Already thought they were an admin, Experienced and trusted editor who will make a great admin!, The opposes are laughable and should be ignored in their entirety (RECALL should be down to the individual and imho shouldn't really be asked at RFAs as it's sort of irrelevant in some ways), Anyway easy support. No red flags. –[[User:Davey2010|<span style="color:blue;">'''Davey'''</span><span style="color:orange;">'''2010'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Davey2010|<span style="color:navy;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 17:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #Seems to have the appropriate experience and temperament to make a good admin. If the biggest thing against him is that he won't do voluntary recall - when the community has rejected forcing recall on admin - that says there isn't much to argue against. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 18:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #Admittedly, I'm not too familiar with this candidate, but they appear to have all the necessary qualifications, and given that this is one of the least convincing RfA oppose sections in recent memory, I see no reason to deny Whpq the extra buttons in their interface. Q4 was merely about whether the candidate would be open to [[Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall|this archaic procedure]]; it was not a question about whether the candidate would be open to feedback from the broader community about their administrative actions. In fact, they specifically stated they ''would'' resign if they felt that they lost the confidence of the community. Editors in the oppose section are tunnel-visioning on the phrase "editors I trust and respect" and interpreting it to mean that they would ignore the views of people not within that subset of the community, but that's not what the candidate is saying. Determining whether you have lost the confidence of the community can be vague and subjective, but one big red flag is when editors you respect (e.g. perhaps because you have worked with them on projects in the past) are telling you to resign. [[User:Mz7|Mz7]] ([[User talk:Mz7|talk]]) 18:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support'''. No further comment. [[User:SWinxy|SWinxy]] ([[User talk:SWinxy|talk]]) 20:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' as we need more copyright admins. I respect the right of other editors to oppose based on recall though. [[User:Chess|Chess]] ([[User talk:Chess|talk]]) <small>(please use {{tlx|reply to|Chess}} on reply)</small><!--Template:Please ping--> 20:26, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' - Reliable user.[[User:CAPTAIN RAJU|<span style="font-family: Bradley Hand ITC;">'''CAPTAIN RAJU'''</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:CAPTAIN RAJU|(T)]]</sup> 21:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC) #'''Support''' - I like his user name. [[User:T. Mammothy|T. Mammothy]] ([[User talk:T. Mammothy|talk]]) 21:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC) # has a clue, not a jerk. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 23:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC) ▲#'''Support''' #'''Support'''. I have run across Whpq's work here in the past, and I have no objections, despite what others may say about the response to Q4. --<span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">[[User:Kinu|<strong style="color:blue">Kinu</strong>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Kinu|<i style="color: red">t</i>]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Kinu|<i style="color:red">c</i>]]</sub></span> 03:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC) =====Oppose===== Line 341 ⟶ 352: *::Oh. So not with a weird swooshing and guttural sound...? Eh, fine with me. –[[User:LordPeterII|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: darkgreen">LordPeterII</span>]] ([[User talk:LordPeterII#top|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: darkgreen">talk</span>]]) 16:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC) <!-- Place a horizontal rule (----) between separate discussions for organization. --> :''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|this nomination]] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div> | |||